551 réponses à ce sujet

[Persephone]

IanPolaris wrote...

Persephone wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Er, no. Except for a werewolf merchant and the Epilogue slideshow. Returning to Orzammar after either king's coronation changes nada. Recruiting the Hero Of River Dane is of little consequence either, as people will not even comment on it or bash the man while he is standing right next to my Warden.

Not true.  We hear in the game itself that Bhelen is changing rules and recuiting casteless into the military and Harrowmount isn't.  That's a big change right there.  The Golem decision has obvious long term consequences as does whether or not Alistair or Anora rules Fereldan (or if they do jointly).  The changse might be minor with regard to the fight against the Archdemon, but they are large and meaningful changes to the world nevertheless.

-Polaris

Hardly. We do not even KNOW the consequences of Hawke's decisions yet, as DAII did not opt for a slideshow. And even IF gossips blab about casteless being recruited, the numbers remain the same either way. Large changes? Not in my book.

Nope.  I am dead on the money and my points above didn't rely on epilog slides.  We learn those differences IN THE GAME if you go back to the areas in question.  Certainly who rules Orzammar and Fereldan makes a big frakking deal.  You are just trying minimize a real choice in DAO to make DA2 look better.  That's all.

-Polaris

I went back there and noticed nothing akin to a real difference. Even Fable III did that better. There is no need for me to make DAII "look better", DAO sure gets a lot of that kind of treatment though. It makes little difference so far, outside of the epilogue slideshow. That's just my opinion though, if you got more out of it, more power to you.

[Persephone]

IanPolaris wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Persephone wrote...

It adds a layer of realism that you cannot change everything with a click anymore. (Though I appreciated the choices with Feynriel, Anders etc.) I do not think it was a good idea to rip out world changing ideas either though, a little more balance would have been nice. 

Sure, I agree and hopefully DA3 is more balanced in that regard.

You mean make it like DAO where you could make both big changes and little changes to individual lives both.

-Polaris

No. Please not like DAO where my Warden is anything but a realistic person. More like TW2 with DAII's character building and personal choices merged into a bigger entity.

[Elhanan]

Maybe someone mentioned it to the OP, but perhaps Hawke is meant to 'feel' powerless concerning the alteration of future events, as mentioned by Flemeth:

"Hurtled into the chaos, you fight... and the world will shake before you. (Aside, to herself) Is it fate or chance? I can never decide."

"Regret is something I know well. Take care not to cling to it, to hold it so close that it poisons your soul."

"We stand upon the precipice of change. The world fears the inevitable plummet into the abyss. Watch for that moment... and when it comes, do not hesitate to leap. It is only when you fall that you learn whether you can fly"

"Without an end, there can be no peace. It gets no easier. Your struggles have only just begun... "

"The time has come for me to leave. You have my thanks...and my sympathy. "

But I enjoyed both DAO and DA2, so no qualms with any of the main characters. Two different ways of storytelling; both offering hundreds of hours of play. While one may be considered 'better' than the other, that does not equate to being 'right'; opinions simply differ.

And Bhelen lived?

Modifié par Elhanan, 20 août 2011 - 01:43 .

[Il Divo]

Elhanan wrote...

Maybe someone mentioned it to the OP, but perhaps Hawke is meant to 'feel' powerless concerning the alteration of future events, as mentioned by Flemeth:

I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case. Much of the framed narrative betwen Varric and Cassandra does hint at this. At first, she thought that Hawke was the catalyst of everything that occurs in Kirkwall, and we discover that he was essentially at the wrong place at the wrong time for most events.

I personally think it's fine as a story-telling device, but I can see why it's less popular for a video game. In most Bioware games, your character is a God, deciding the fate of civilizations, leveling Empires to the ground. This makes you (as the PC) feel epic, which is going to be noticeably absent if your character is powerless.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 août 2011 - 03:25 .

[Monica21]

Elhanan wrote...

Maybe someone mentioned it to the OP, but perhaps Hawke is meant to 'feel' powerless concerning the alteration of future events, as mentioned by Flemeth:

Agreed, and I've said as much upthread. The story is "this is how the mage/templar war started" and Hawke just happens to be in the center of things, whether he wants to be or not.

The only thing I really think is that the execution could have been far better. I think that narrative isn't strong enough throughout the three acts to tie them together well, and then the game feels like it lacks cohesion. I think you and I disagree on that, but essentially Hawke was never supposed to be a super hero.

[Persephone]

Monica21 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Maybe someone mentioned it to the OP, but perhaps Hawke is meant to 'feel' powerless concerning the alteration of future events, as mentioned by Flemeth:

Agreed, and I've said as much upthread. The story is "this is how the mage/templar war started" and Hawke just happens to be in the center of things, whether he wants to be or not.

The only thing I really think is that the execution could have been far better. I think that narrative isn't strong enough throughout the three acts to tie them together well, and then the game feels like it lacks cohesion. I think you and I disagree on that, but essentially Hawke was never supposed to be a super hero.

This sums it up rather nicely. Spot on, Monica, as (almost) always.

[LobselVith8]

Morroian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

It's still Hawke being proactive, even if it's a failure.

If Hawke is proactive, why does he allow bad guys to walk away when it's within his power to stop them

Bit hard to be pro active when he has no knowledge that they're bad guys.

The scenes I'm thinking about are actually when Hawke knows full well that the respective person (or people) are bad (the first that comes to mind actually tried to kill Hawke, which he calls the person out on at the end of the quest).

[Willybot]

Monica21 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Maybe someone mentioned it to the OP, but perhaps Hawke is meant to 'feel' powerless concerning the alteration of future events, as mentioned by Flemeth:

Agreed, and I've said as much upthread. The story is "this is how the mage/templar war started" and Hawke just happens to be in the center of things, whether he wants to be or not.

The only thing I really think is that the execution could have been far better. I think that narrative isn't strong enough throughout the three acts to tie them together well, and then the game feels like it lacks cohesion. I think you and I disagree on that, but essentially Hawke was never supposed to be a super hero.

I'd agree that DA2 was mostly meant to be a prologue of sorts for whatever chapters may follow. If was a stand-alone or start of a new series then I wouldn't grumble about it, but it was marketed as a sequel and labeled as such. I felt that I had a much larger impact on the goings-on in Origins and, ending of the blight aside, felt that that I had an influence on the fates of other factions at the end. Much moreso, in my opinion, than DA2 anyway.

To me if the story is meant to convey inevitability, then perhaps a sequel to Dragon Age wasn't the right medium. A novel or, with the emphasis on violence to solve all Fereldan's problems, a comic series would fit the narrative of 2 better.

[LobselVith8]

Persephone wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

2.  Because Hawke is not our character.  He's DG's character that we are only allowed to rent for a few hours.  I thought you understood that.

-Polaris

Not my Hawke, Ian, definitely not.

I have to be honest, it's more than a little difficult for Hawke to feel like my character when the protagonist is saying lines of dialogue with no imput from me, when the dialogue options often have him saying something entirely different than what I had intended or ever would have wanted, and more than a few creative decisions about him are outside my control (like being atheist, for instance, as The Warden could be).

[Persephone]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

2.  Because Hawke is not our character.  He's DG's character that we are only allowed to rent for a few hours.  I thought you understood that.

-Polaris

Not my Hawke, Ian, definitely not.

I have to be honest, it's more than a little difficult for Hawke to feel like my character when the protagonist is saying lines of dialogue with no imput from me, when the dialogue options often have him saying something entirely different than what I had intended or ever would have wanted, and more than a few creative decisions about him are outside my control (like being atheist, for instance, as The Warden could be).

I haven't had many surprises with the dialogue, so I cannot concur there. As for being an atheist, you can. You can flat out tell the Grand Cleric that she is useless and deny the Maker to her face.

[IanPolaris]

Persephone wrote...

I haven't had many surprises with the dialogue, so I cannot concur there. As for being an atheist, you can. You can flat out tell the Grand Cleric that she is useless and deny the Maker to her face.

No you can't.  You can call the Chantry a fraud and denigrate the maker and even question his existance in a rant, but that does not an athiest make.  In DAO, you had the option in many places of denying the maker with no quibbles.  Not so in DA2.  Of course that's because the Warden was your character and Hawke is DG's character that you are allowed to play with for a while.

-Polaris

[LobselVith8]

Persephone wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I have to be honest, it's more than a little difficult for Hawke to feel like my character when the protagonist is saying lines of dialogue with no imput from me, when the dialogue options often have him saying something entirely different than what I had intended or ever would have wanted, and more than a few creative decisions about him are outside my control (like being atheist, for instance, as The Warden could be).

I haven't had many surprises with the dialogue, so I cannot concur there. As for being an atheist, you can. You can flat out tell the Grand Cleric that she is useless and deny the Maker to her face.

Hawke doesn't outright tell the Grand Cleric that he doesn't believe in the Maker in Anders' Act III quest "Justice," he seems to side-step the issue a bit by posing it as somewhat of a question (if he exists) rather than an authoriative declaration of his personal beliefs, and his scene with a romanced Merrill makes it evident he thinks [spoiler] is with the Maker in Act II. Even the Legacy line that lists Hawke saying he thinks the story of the Golden City is a lie doesn't actually permit Hawke to verbally say it's a fabrication.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 20 août 2011 - 05:40 .

[Persephone]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I have to be honest, it's more than a little difficult for Hawke to feel like my character when the protagonist is saying lines of dialogue with no imput from me, when the dialogue options often have him saying something entirely different than what I had intended or ever would have wanted, and more than a few creative decisions about him are outside my control (like being atheist, for instance, as The Warden could be).

I haven't had many surprises with the dialogue, so I cannot concur there. As for being an atheist, you can. You can flat out tell the Grand Cleric that she is useless and deny the Maker to her face.

Hawke doesn't outright tell the Grand Cleric that he doesn't believe in the Maker in Anders' Act III quest "Justice," he seems to side-step the issue a bit by posing it as somewhat of a question (if he exists) rather than an authoriative declaration of his personal beliefs, and his scene with a romanced Merrill makes it evident he thinks [spoiler] is with the Maker in Act II. Even the Legacy line that lists Hawke saying he thinks the story of the Golden City is a lie doesn't actually permit Hawke to verbally say it's a fabrication.

Well, in my case, it's enough material to satisfy my idea of a non-believing Hawke. Fantasy RPGs rarely allow their PCs to be atheists to begin with.

Might I suggest playing Eschalon? You can choose to be an atheist during character creation there. And it has consequences too.

[LobselVith8]

Persephone wrote...

Well, in my case, it's enough material to satisfy my idea of a non-believing Hawke. Fantasy RPGs rarely allow their PCs to be atheists to begin with.

Might I suggest playing Eschalon? You can choose to be an atheist during character creation there. And it has consequences too. 

I was finishing up Old World Blues (DLC for NV) before Legacy. It was a great DLC that had consequences, too.

[Dormiglione]

Il Divo wrote...

I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case. Much of the framed narrative betwen Varric and Cassandra does hint at this. At first, she thought that Hawke was the catalyst of everything that occurs in Kirkwall, and we discover that he was essentially at the wrong place at the wrong time for most events.

I personally think it's fine as a story-telling device, but I can see why it's less popular for a video game. In most Bioware games, your character is a God, deciding the fate of civilizations, leveling Empires to the ground. This makes you (as the PC) feel epic, which is going to be noticeably absent if your character is powerless.

Agree with this post. Hawke as a warrior, rouge or mage has enough power to influence the fate of many citizens and lead the the city to the better or worse over the years.
But as many mentioned. Hawke was "railroaded" not in the sense of "go there, quest 1, then go over there quest 2, and so on" but in a sense of "folks, this is the story of Hawke, it happened a while ago, so how it went is set in stone".
Good setting if you want to produce an epic movie. But not working for a RPG where you expect "every decision shapes the world..". I dont want to blame the framed narrative. Its a good RPG element. You can use the framed narrative without "railroading" the way how the story unfolds.
Hawke is NOT powerless. He felt powerless because he was scripted that way. The outcoming is the same. Its absolute unsatisfying to play a character that has no way to unfold himself. This is absolute deadly for replayability.
I can only guess why Hawke was scripted this way. Maybe it was because of the lack of origins and races. With only one origin male/female human you had to write a character that tries to appeal all player. A compromise, not too bad not too good minded, a character that has to stay on a "middle" line because an extreme in both direction would not appeal a big audience of player.

Sadly, i can only hope that the writer of Hawke character has learned his/her lesson.

[Persephone]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Well, in my case, it's enough material to satisfy my idea of a non-believing Hawke. Fantasy RPGs rarely allow their PCs to be atheists to begin with.

Might I suggest playing Eschalon? You can choose to be an atheist during character creation there. And it has consequences too. 

I was finishing up Old World Blues (DLC for NV) before Legacy. It was a great DLC that had consequences, too.

Where did I say anything about Legacy?

And thanks for the hint. Might get that DLC now.:happy:

[LobselVith8]

Persephone wrote...

Where did I say anything about Legacy?

And thanks for the hint. Might get that DLC now.:happy: 

I was talking about having played Old World Blues before I played Legacy.

[Elhanan]

Dormiglione wrote...

Agree with this post. Hawke as a warrior, rouge or mage has enough power to influence the fate of many citizens and lead the the city to the better or worse over the years.
But as many mentioned. Hawke was "railroaded" not in the sense of "go there, quest 1, then go over there quest 2, and so on" but in a sense of "folks, this is the story of Hawke, it happened a while ago, so how it went is set in stone".
Good setting if you want to produce an epic movie. But not working for a RPG where you expect "every decision shapes the world..". I dont want to blame the framed narrative. Its a good RPG element. You can use the framed narrative without "railroading" the way how the story unfolds.
Hawke is NOT powerless. He felt powerless because he was scripted that way. The outcoming is the same. Its absolute unsatisfying to play a character that has no way to unfold himself. This is absolute deadly for replayability.
I can only guess why Hawke was scripted this way. Maybe it was because of the lack of origins and races. With only one origin male/female human you had to write a character that tries to appeal all player. A compromise, not too bad not too good minded, a character that has to stay on a "middle" line because an extreme in both direction would not appeal a big audience of player.

Sadly, i can only hope that the writer of Hawke character has learned his/her lesson.

What lesson? That they must please those that agree with said opinion? Puh-Lease!

The game was and is satisfying for many; have replayed it thrice and am on 4th current playthrough currently. Have enjoyed Legacy three times as additions to the other sessions. Played once as a female mage, and other sessions as male Hawkes. Etc.

Just because it may be your opinion does not make it fact; just your opinion....

[Dormiglione]

Elhanan wrote...

Dormiglione wrote...

Agree with this post. Hawke as a warrior, rouge or mage has enough power to influence the fate of many citizens and lead the the city to the better or worse over the years.
But as many mentioned. Hawke was "railroaded" not in the sense of "go there, quest 1, then go over there quest 2, and so on" but in a sense of "folks, this is the story of Hawke, it happened a while ago, so how it went is set in stone".
Good setting if you want to produce an epic movie. But not working for a RPG where you expect "every decision shapes the world..". I dont want to blame the framed narrative. Its a good RPG element. You can use the framed narrative without "railroading" the way how the story unfolds.
Hawke is NOT powerless. He felt powerless because he was scripted that way. The outcoming is the same. Its absolute unsatisfying to play a character that has no way to unfold himself. This is absolute deadly for replayability.
I can only guess why Hawke was scripted this way. Maybe it was because of the lack of origins and races. With only one origin male/female human you had to write a character that tries to appeal all player. A compromise, not too bad not too good minded, a character that has to stay on a "middle" line because an extreme in both direction would not appeal a big audience of player.

Sadly, i can only hope that the writer of Hawke character has learned his/her lesson.

What lesson? That they must please those that agree with said opinion? Puh-Lease!

The game was and is satisfying for many; have replayed it thrice and am on 4th current playthrough currently. Have enjoyed Legacy three times as additions to the other sessions. Played once as a female mage, and other sessions as male Hawkes. Etc.

Just because it may be your opinion does not make it fact; just your opinion....

If everything was alright then why was it necessary to make interviews like "in defense of Dragon Age 2" just a month after DA 2 was released? Recently, why are there so many interviews where the Lead Designer / Developer of DA 2 say that they want to melt together the best of DAO and DA2. Because DA2 was alright?

Im happy for you when you enjoy DA2. For me DA2 remains a huge disappointment and im not the only one. But i didnt lost fate in the DA2 team. I bought Legacy DLC to see if the dev team kept their promises. I was pleasantly surprised. The Legacy DLC is a good step in the right direction. I enjoyed playing the Legacy DLC but this doesnt change my opinion about DA2.

And when did i say that i was talking about facts? Maybe you missed that? >> I can only guess why Hawke was scripted this way...

[Elhanan]

Dormiglione wrote...

If everything was alright then why was it necessary to make interviews like "in defense of Dragon Age 2" just a month after DA 2 was released? Recently, why are there so many interviews where the Lead Designer / Developer of DA 2 say that they want to melt together the best of DAO and DA2. Because DA2 was alright?

Im happy for you when you enjoy DA2. For me DA2 remains a huge disappointment and im not the only one. But i didnt lost fate in the DA2 team. I bought Legacy DLC to see if the dev team kept their promises. I was pleasantly surprised. The Legacy DLC is a good step in the right direction. I enjoyed playing the Legacy DLC but this doesnt change my opinion about DA2.

And when did i say that i was talking about facts? Maybe you missed that? >> I can only guess why Hawke was scripted this way...

I dunno; maybe because folks always seem to have different opinions? Just a guess based on the few post-aplogetic materials I have seen....

Simply because your opinion does not mesh with that of the designers - even if your opinion is shared by the majority or not - does not define fact. All I have to do is present a single exception to your subjective rule, and my own opinion would be enough to indicate this notion as false. But I ain't the only one; clearly evident if one were to avoid blinders and bias (and belief that sites like Metacritic speak for all).

To indicate some points in your response of opinion vs factual confusion:

"...Hawke is NOT powerless. He felt powerless because he was scripted that way. The outcoming is the same. Its absolute unsatisfying to play a character that has no way to unfold himself. This is absolute deadly for replayability.
I can only guess why Hawke was scripted this way. Maybe it was because of the lack of origins and races. With only one origin male/female human you had to write a character that tries to appeal all player. A compromise, not too bad not too good minded, a character that has to stay on a "middle" line because an extreme in both direction would not appeal a big audience of player.

Sadly, i can only hope that the writer of Hawke character has learned his/her lesson. "

Again, no lesson need be learned by the designers. But perhaps others need to open minds for some fresh insight to that of opion vs fact.

Modifié par Elhanan, 21 août 2011 - 07:45 .

[Dave of Canada]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Hawke doesn't outright tell the Grand Cleric that he doesn't believe in the Maker in Anders' Act III quest "Justice," he seems to side-step the issue a bit by posing it as somewhat of a question (if he exists) rather than an authoriative declaration of his personal beliefs, and his scene with a romanced Merrill makes it evident he thinks [spoiler] is with the Maker in Act II. Even the Legacy line that lists Hawke saying he thinks the story of the Golden City is a lie doesn't actually permit Hawke to verbally say it's a fabrication.

So you're nitpicking and not seeing how you can possibly build Hawke to be an athiest with all that dialogue, simply to have a grievance?

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 21 août 2011 - 07:51 .

[IanPolaris]

I think the lesson is, "don't pidgeonhole yourself into one particular character" and allow the player to chose a wide variety (yes like in DAO and most other true RPGS...and no TW and TW2 aren't RPGs either...but that limit was known in advance). If you can't do that with a voiced protagonist, then DROP the voiced protagonist. It's too limiting.

-Polaris

[Elhanan]

IanPolaris wrote...

I think the lesson is, "don't pidgeonhole yourself into one particular character" and allow the player to chose a wide variety (yes like in DAO and most other true RPGS...and no TW and TW2 aren't RPGs either...but that limit was known in advance). If you can't do that with a voiced protagonist, then DROP the voiced protagonist. It's too limiting.

-Polaris

What pigeon holing? My current PC is a male Mage Hawke that speaks with graciousness and humor to allies, and may choose to speak more harshly to others. If one selects that same response tree each time, then it would seem that the perceived fault lies with the Player; not the designer.

[Dormiglione]

Elhanan wrote...


I dunno; maybe because folks always seem to have different opinions? Just a guess based on the few post-aplogetic materials I have seen....

Simply because your opinion does not mesh with that of the designers - even if your opinion is shared by the majority or not - does not define fact. All I have to do is present a single exception to your subjective rule, and my own opinion would be enough to indicate this notion as false. But I ain't the only one; clearly evident if one were to avoid blinders and bias (and belief that sites like Metacritic speak for all).

To indicate some points in your response of opinion vs factual confusion:

"...Hawke is NOT powerless. He felt powerless because he was scripted that way. The outcoming is the same. Its absolute unsatisfying to play a character that has no way to unfold himself. This is absolute deadly for replayability.
I can only guess why Hawke was scripted this way. Maybe it was because of the lack of origins and races. With only one origin male/female human you had to write a character that tries to appeal all player. A compromise, not too bad not too good minded, a character that has to stay on a "middle" line because an extreme in both direction would not appeal a big audience of player.

Sadly, i can only hope that the writer of Hawke character has learned his/her lesson. "

Again, no lesson need be learned by the designers. But perhaps others need to open minds for some fresh insight to that of opion vs fact.

Now this is a fact:
Its absolute unsatisfying to play a character that has no way to unfold himself
There is no replayability if every decision you make has the same outcome. I made 4 playthroughs in DA2 just to unlock all achievements and tried to get different outcomes, tried to find where there is a story branch, meaningful decisions, even if they are illusions like DAO has. I was disappointed.
DAO i played more than 10 playthroughs and started recently a new playthrough with a mage just to see how much acknowledgment this DAO back story has when i import it in DA2. Stopped playing in the second act of DA2. It should have been my 5th playthrough but i quit the game.

No lesson to learn? Really? Old and recent interviews tell another story.

[LobselVith8]

Dave of Canada wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Hawke doesn't outright tell the Grand Cleric that he doesn't believe in the Maker in Anders' Act III quest "Justice," he seems to side-step the issue a bit by posing it as somewhat of a question (if he exists) rather than an authoriative declaration of his personal beliefs, and his scene with a romanced Merrill makes it evident he thinks [spoiler] is with the Maker in Act II. Even the Legacy line that lists Hawke saying he thinks the story of the Golden City is a lie doesn't actually permit Hawke to verbally say it's a fabrication.

So you're nitpicking and not seeing how you can possibly build Hawke to be an athiest with all that dialogue, simply to have a grievance?

How is it nitpicking to address I lack an option in Dragon Age 2 that was avaliable in Origins? I get that you like Dragon Age 2, but that doesn't change the fact that it denies the player the option to have an atheist protagonist, and that isn't changed by the dialogue option in Anders' Act III quest.